KODAI Vs. AJODHYA SINGH AND ORS.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) AJODHYA Singh and others instituted a suit in the Court of the Munsif against Kodai for a declaration that they were the Bhumidhars in possession of the disputed plots. They claimed an alter, native relief that if they were found to be out of possession, then a decree for recovery of possession should also, be passed in their favour. The allegations in the plaint were that the disputed plots were the sir and khudkasht of the Plaintiffs, that they had made a usufructuary mortgage of the plots with Kodai, that on the commencement of the UP ZA and LR Act (hereinafter called the Act), the usufructuary mortgage was converted into a simple mortgage, that the Defendant then ceased to hold possession of the disputed plots, that the Plaintiffs thereafter came into possession of the plots but the Defendant forcibly regained possession and that he was accordingly liable to be evicted.

(2.) THE Defendant contested the suit and asserted that he was never the mortgage; of the plots, that he was in possession thereof as a tenant and that on the commencement of the Act, he became a bhumidhar.

(3.) KODAI preferred an appeal against the decree of the Munsif to the learned Civil Judge. The learned Civil judge held that the Plaintiffs had failed to prove the alleged mortgage in respect of plot No. 679/451. As regards the other plots he held that Kodai was in possession over them as a mortgagee from the Plaintiffs who were sirdar and khudkasht holders on the date of the mortgage. The learned Civil Judge accordingly set aside the decree of the learned Munsif in respect of the plot No. 679/451 only but affirmed his decree in respect of the other plots.